If I were going to consider Pentecostal Contributions to Christian Philosophy, I wouldn’t title my book Thinking In Tongues.
Product Description:
In this inaugural Pentecostal Manifestos volume Smith begins from the conviction that implicit in Pentecostal and charismatic spirituality is a tacit worldview or “social imaginary.” Thinking in Tongues unpacks and articulates the key elements of this Pentecostal worldview and then explores their implications for philosophical reflection on ontology, epistemology, aesthetics, language, science, and philosophy of religion. In each case, Smith demonstrates how the implicit wisdom of Pentecostal spirituality makes unique contributions to current conversations in Christian philosophy. (read more…)
Pentecostal Theology is more complex than Tongues.
Unless Tongues is a shorthand for Pentecostal Theology. But even this I think is a kind of pigeonholing.
Yup, it is pigeonholing at its finest. But at the same time, it is great to see Pentecostals engaging more with academia.
Yeah, I too am encouraged by the academic contributions, now as the subtitle suggests.
Yes, more complex than just tongues. It’s about experiencing God in the here and now in and through the presence and the power of the Holy Spirit.
Actually, from a pentecostal point of view, “Thinking in Tongues” is a good title. It captures the dimension where pentecostals work and actually answers many of the questions non-pentecostals ask. Until one uses this gift, it is very difficult to evaluate it. After time within the gift – many venues of thinking unfold which were not present before. So, in many ways, tongues opens the door to other gifts that await a supernatural “seeing.”
I realize I am talking “gibberish” to many. But really, this is a title that says much to a pentecostal. I do not exactly know why you call it “pigeonholing.” The gifts of the Holy Spirit work in “clusters” if you will. They work in harmony with one another. This title doesn’t elevate “tongues” over other gifts – it just begins an entrance to them, which is the experience of many.
I realize this is “beyond the sacred page,” and into living in and with gifts, but maybe it will help someone.
I guess my first reaction to the title was laughter, but then again I have an unusual sense of humor, and yes I’m Pentecostal for the most part.
I find this title clever, funny, embarrassing, and disgusting all at the same time!
I think it is a fitting title. Doesn’t Smith deal a lot with linguistics and epistemology (e.g. his work on Derrida)? Glossolalia says a lot about that to some extent. Besides, it is catchy marketing!
I find it an interesting title.
There is a lot of Pentecostal research and engagement within academic circles. Seems Asia is leading the way in this regard. Though certainly we have Fee in America.
Brian F,
I think so too. But after reading the other comments, I got to say that it is indeed catchy.
Iris,
Outside of the Acts narrative, I object to tongues being an entrance gift. But if you hold to tongues as evidence of having the Spirit, then I see your point.
Robert,
My first reaction to your title was laughter, but then again I have an unusual sense of humor, and yes I’m NOT Pentecostal for the most part.
Crystal said: “I find this title clever, funny, embarrassing, and disgusting all at the same time!”
Now, that’s a lot in one take.
Brian L,
To some extent, but I would have gone with Thinking in the Spirit: A Pentecostal Contribution to Christian Philosophy.
True, it is indeed catchy marketing.
Craig,
I’m also aware of the Journal of Pentecostal Theology. How about Fee for all of us non-Pentecostals?
Hats off to Iris, she basically hit it right on. Many an issue or situation and such that is unresolved often finds itself resolved after one has spent time thinking/praying in tongues since that is the same as praying in the Spirit. And that more than just unresolved issues.
Brian,
I thought praying in tongues/praying in the Spirit is a sign of weakness? At any rate, Fee concedes this, in reflection on Romans 8:26-27.
I have not read Fee on this, but I am very much a reader of Scripture. Nowhere is tongues (or any other gifts of the Spirit) equated with weakness. They are a part of the supernatural “tool box” – if you will, that is given to us to work as supernatural beings in this world.
The weakness of Romans 8:26-27 is in the natural, that we do not know how to pray. Then we need to realize the Spirit is always praying for us. I do not happen to believe this passage is talking specifically about tongues, but about a work of the Spirit due to our natural weakness.
Iris,
Fair enough. Not everyone believes Romans 8:26-27 is referencing speaking in tongues.
For sure the gift is Spirit-inspired. But we must also conclude that it’s in a time of weakness, according to Romans 8:26. But of course this is only if you believe tongue-speaking is also in view.
But of course, TC, aren’t all gifts, in a sense, provisions for our present “time of weakness” prior to the eschaton? We have gifts because we the perfect has not yet come – then, they will cease (1 Cor. 13:8-13). In 1 Cor. 13:8-12, it seems that the Spiritual gifts we currently experience (including prophecy, tongues, knowledge, etc.) are God’s gracious provision to us “until the perfect comes,” when they will no longer be needed because we will know fully and see face to face.
Furthermore, it would appear that the weakness in Romans 8:26 is not a general “I’m-in-a-difficult-circumstance-right-now-weakness,” but rather is tied up with the “sufferings of the present time” (Rom. 8:18). Precisely because we live this side of the redemption of our bodies (the not-yet), we need the gifts the Spirit provides, whether tongues or otherwise. Of course, because we have begun to live in the new age (the already), we have the “firstfruits of the Spirit,” which includes, though is not limited to, Spiritual gifts.
So while I think that tongues as the focus of Rom. 8:26 is up for discussion (points on either side), I would argue that tongues, like all other gifts, are for weakness, but in an eschatological sense.
- Tim
Tim,
Thanks for this. Your reference to v. 18, which begins this sectional-thinking of Paul, caused me to rethink and truly appreciate your insights. Spot on. You’re so correct. Thanks.
Thanks, T.C. Like Robert, I’m so grateful for your heart toward your Pentecostal (or in my case, Reformed-Charismatic) brothers & sisters.
Tim,
We’ve got a lot in common, then.
TC, I really appreciate your attitude my non-Pentecostal bother
Robert,
The weight of Scripture, in all its beauty, breaks me every time. When this doesn’t happen, I better be concerned. Thanks, my Pentecostal bro.
TC,
cool, I thank God for you and others, you guys have made discussing theology so much better and productive. Be blessed!
Seeing that if one speaks in tongues he needs an interpreter for he speaks mysteries, now when you take it to ‘thinking in tongues’ what dimention are we entering into? Does one need an interpreter too? My biggest concern though- as a one time tongue speaking-demon chasing-pull the heavens down vigilante but now by Grace a Reformed Christian is: Is this really Biblical or are we searching and pandering for another mystic gift to add a spiritual notch on our shoulders?
it’s not a mystical gift, it is a gift of the Holy Spirit though perhaps it has mystical aspects to it (which isn’t all bad). So. yes, it really is biblical and there are Reformed folk who have and use this gift regularly. Also, interpretation is only needed if one speaks out loud, or loud enough for all to hear, in the congregation (cf. 1 Cor 14). Hope that helps.